26 
PACIFIC SCIENCE, Vol. VI, January, 1952 
The Eriocraniidae possess mandibles which 
are reduced and nonfunctional, the lacinia 
is absent, and the galea is modified to form a 
short haustellum. The pupa of Eriocrania 
purpurella Haw. has been described by Chap- 
man (1893: 255-258) and that of Mnemonica 
auricyanea Wals. by Busck and Boving (1914: 
155-158). They have truncate clubbed man- 
dibles which are toothed or scalloped apically. 
The larva of M. auricyanea has been described 
by Busck and Boving {op. cit.), that of Chap- 
mania sparmanella Bose, by Grandi (1933: 
145-150), and that of Eriocrania sangi Wood, 
by Jayewickereme (1940: 89). They have 
short antennae and simple body setae and 
the compound eyes, thoracic legs, and ab- 
dominal prolegs are absent. These larvae are 
leaf miners in the leaves of Betulaceae and 
Cupuliferae. The family is not represented in 
the Southern Hemisphere. 
The Neopseustidae are said by Hering 
(1925: 143-147), who removed the genus 
Neopseustis from the Eriocraniidae, to lack the 
jugum and to have both mandibles and 
haustellum present. The larva and pupa are 
unknown as also is the food plant. The two 
known species occur in India and Formosa. 
The Mnesarchaeidae have the mandibles 
and lacinia absent and the galea forming a 
long haustellum. The larva, pupa, and food 
plant are unknown. The family is confined to 
New Zealand. 
The adult morphology of this superfamily, 
especially the mouth parts, venation, and 
genitalia, have been studied by Busck and 
Boving (1914), Tillyard (1919 and 1923^), 
Philpott (1924 and 1927), and Issiki (1931). 
As will be seen from the foregoing short ac- 
count of the families, the larval and pupal 
stages and the food plants and habits of these 
insects are known in relatively few cases. In 
fact. Chapman’s (1894: 337) comment, "I 
was much impressed with the resistance of 
the Eriocephalidae to investigation ... I had 
little idea that they would continue this re- 
sistance for so many years,” is still apropos. 
Agathiphaga cannot be placed in the 
Mnesarchaeidae as defined by Tillyard (1926: 1 
411-412), as the mandibles are present and ' 
the haustellum absent, and, while vein Ri is I 
unbranched in A. queenslandensis, R2 and R3 
are separate veins in both A. queenslandensis 
and A. vitiensis. In Viette’s (1947: 25) key to 
the families, Agathiphaga would run to the 
Neopseustidae, but it cannot be placed in 
this family because the jugum is present, there i 
are two apical spurs on the middle tibiae, and J 
the haustellum is absent. There is some evi- [i 
dence of affinity with the Eriocraniidae, such |! 
as the reduction of the mandibles, the pres- ! 
ence of two apical spurs on the middle tibia, j 
the absence of the sensory process of the 
basal segment of the labial palps, and the ab- 
sence of the asymmetrical hair brushes on the j 
epipharynx. The form of the pupal mandibles 
is similar to that of the known eriocraniid 
pupae. The larvae, with short antennae and 
no compound eyes, thoracic legs, abdominal 
prolegs, or flattened body processes, resemble 
the eriocraniids. 
The genus appears to conform more closely 
with the Micropterygidae than with any of 
the other families. The mandibles, though 
reduced, are apparently functional and have 
at least one reduced tooth present, the maxil- 
lary lacinia is present, and the galea is* present 
but not elongated. The radial cell is present, 
as it is in all micropterygid genera except 
Palaeomicroides and Neomicropteryx. It is also 
present, however, in the eriocraniid genus 
Eriocraniella. 
Agathiphaga does not fit the emended 
family diagnosis of the Micropterygidae 
given by Issiki (1931: 1037-1038), in that 
ocelli are absent, and there is no branch of Sc. 
The sensory process on the labial palps, 
figured by Tillyard (1923^: 189) in Sabatinca, 
by Busck and Boving (1914: pL xv, fig. 6) 
in Micropteryx ammanella Aub., and by Issiki 
(1931 : 1035) in Japanese micropterygids, is 
absent, as are the epipharyngeal hair brushes 
figured by Tillyard (1923^: 183), and Issiki 
( 1931 : 1033 ). The female genital apparatus is 
unlike that of the micropterygids in the long 
