ACONTIINAE. General remarks by Dr. A. Seitz. 
415 
G. simplex Hulst. The 3rd segment of palpi is somewhat longer. Forewings pale ashen grey, very in- simplex. 
distinctly marked. Inner line somewhat darker grey with paler grey inner edge, oblique, excurved in cell. Close 
behind this is the similarly coloured central line, more widely excurved behind the cell, outwardly with faintly 
distinguishable white scales. Marginal area somewhat darker than the rest of the wing, proximally with short 
pale oblique submarginal line. Hindwings transparent, grey at margin. $ 19 mm. Tenimber. 
G. semipfumbea Warr. Leaden grey, darker at costa. The inner line white with delicate black edge, 
straight, oblique to submedian fold. There it conjoins with a yellow band having grey-blue central line, that 
is bent on median nervure and thence both proceed vertically to inner margin. Distally a blackish central band 
extending into the cell and containing yellow striations. Then follows a yellow band with leaden line to nervure 
6, where it turns outwards and radiates a few yellow streaks towards apex, then concavely outwards to nervure 
4 and dentate, vertically to inner margin. Submarginal line whitish, dentate. Hindwing of $ hyaline, grey at 
apex, brown in £, margin grey. 28 mm. New Guinea, Goodenough Island. 
semiplum- 
bra. 
G. microdonta Pimps. (31 i). Ground colour yellowish white with brown markings. The inner line double, microdonia. 
obliquely outwards to submedian fold, then acutely inwards and again outwards over inner margin. Distally a 
wide band with bold dentations outwardly. The dentate double central line obliquely to median nervure, first 
distinct, then diffused. A black dot at disco-cellular. The outer line is also double, proceeding outwards to nerv¬ 
ure 6, then parallel to outer margin inwards. Submarginal line consists of black sagittate marks. Hindwings 
pale brownish. 18 mm. From Singapore and Java, each 1 £ specimen known. 
Subfamily: Acontiinae. 
The family derived its name from the Genus Acontia, a designation, that is rather disturbing in view of 
the changes that have taken place. Ochsenheimer classified in this Genus Acontia a whole number of rather 
small, generally black and white Noctuidae, and there can be no doubt whatever about the group of moths he had 
in mind as generic type. But both he and Lederer, who succeeded him, placed certain species in the Genus, as 
being typical, that were later on removed into other Genera of an older type. From a systematic standpoint 
the removal and re-classification was justified, as it was based not merely on the schematic arrangement of the 
veins (which is so often rather misleading), but also took other characteristics into consideration. In the present 
stage in our knowledge of the larvae, meagre though it often is, one no longer underestimates their value in the 
systematic classification of the perfect insects. The similarity in the build and armature of larvae forces us to 
take this into account when trying to effect correct classification. Everyone is aware that Sphingidae larvae have 
granulated skins and a terminal horn (or its equivalent), Arctiinae are densely hairy, Lymantriidae have brushes 
and tufts, Limacodidcie sucker-legs, Dricanurinae tail-like appendages, Geometridae are “loopers" and Papilionidae 
have an osmaterium (the forked fleshy structure at the neck, that makes its appearance when the caterpillar is 
annoyed). It is therefore almost unbelievable that a resemblance in the retinaculum or in the neuration alone, 
should be deemed sufficient to classify a number of species in one group, where the larvae differ from one 
another so materially. For instance Tar ache lucida has a number of protuberances and 12 legs, it feeds on low- 
growing plants. These characteristics should suffice to separate it from, say, Hylophila prasinana, of which the 
larva is cylindrical, with an unusual broad and big head, 16 legs and that feeds on beech trees. What justification 
is there for placing these two in one subfamily with Tarache (?) luctuosa with its thickset, spherical, earthen 
larva and again with Acontia (?) rnalvae Esp. with its sleek, snake-like larva that has 14 legs? 
Little purpose is served therefore in recounting the characteristics of the species of this subfamily. Not 
a single one can be applied to all the Acontiinae and “exceptions” would be the rule. Certain groups, such as the 
grass-green Tyana-Earias-Hylophila are clearly distinct, even to a layman, from the Carea-Carcades group with 
their heavy, furry, armoured, clumsy hind-tibiae. Others again like the Westermannia have a most remarkable 
silvery, silky, glossy sheen in the scaling of the wings, Vizaga have sky-blue colouration and unusual markings 
and Cacyparis a development of ocelli on the wings, such as is not found elsewhere in the Noctuidae; Sinna are 
so prettily marked as no other order, not even among the Phopalocera. We are therefore forced to confine 
ourselves to what was said in Vol. HI, p. 293 and Vol. XV, p. 191 about the characteristics of the moths grouped 
together under the Acontiinae. 
Of the approximately 350 forms, which were classified in this subfamily and that had been denominated, 
about %rds occur in the indo-australian territory. The variability is similar to that of the Stictopterinae. In 
certain Genera it is almost boundless and the various forms are, even though not distinctly separable, still so 
widely different, that certain specimens are of totally different appearance, as is the case with the Sarrothripinid: 
Plotheia decrescens. We have illustrated on pi. 37 c to e over 20 forms of this curious species. These forms have 
already in the past often been described but E. Strand was the first to denominate them and this undoubtedly 
makes for lucidity. The number of forms found in the indian zone is increased hereby to almost 400 and these 
