28 
leg, by the characteristic larvae, by the hindwing venation, and last, 
but not least, by the researches of my indefatigable friend, the 
Rev. C. R. N. Burrows, on the genital armature. I have referred to 
the larvae in some notes which I read before the North London Natural 
History Society a few years ago, and which are published in The 
Entomologist, xxxviii., pp. 6-11, 43-48 ; but the point which 1 brought 
out as to the characterisation of the whole of Acidalia — Leptomeris by 
its extremely long, thin, comparatively smooth, larvae, was not, I find, 
by any means original, having been noted by Meyrick in his Handbook, 
p. 240, under the generic description, and by a writer in the Guben 
Entomologische Zeitschrift, xiv., p. 13. The latter remarks that the 
larvae of this group show a less marked predilection for dry or withered 
food than those of Ptychopoda. By the way, while on the subject of 
the larvae I may remark that my paper in The Entomologist contained 
a reference (p. 8) to Buckler’s weird italicised statement that the 
larva of ochrata had its central pair of prolegs on the 7th abdominal 
segment, and I was naturally very curious to see the creature. Shortly 
afterwards, thanks to the kindness of my friend, Mr. V. E. Shaw, this 
desire was granted me. Mr. Bacot, to whom was entrusted a critical 
examination, of course found the legs in question on the correct 
segment, but he admitted that the compacting of the segments and 
the backward direction of the prolegs, gave a very deceptive appearance, 
which in some measure excused Buckler’s error. The larva seems, 
for all practical purposes, to be a Ptychopoda, the genus to which, but 
for the $ hindleg, the marginal structure would refer the species. 
Mr. Burrows has found — or perhaps I ought to say Messrs. 
Burrows and Pierce—very satisfactory genitalic characters for defining 
this genus, which (after Meyrick) he has been calling Leptomeris. He 
will himself be able to give you an account of them when he has 
evolved the necessary nomenclature for the “apron” and characteristic 
prongs ; but a glance through the fine and complete series of Acidaliine 
drawings which he has kindly lent me, shows, without anj r specialistic 
knowledge, what a general uniformity of scheme there is, and how 
vastly they differ from the Ptychopoda section. I have arranged the 
drawings in the mixed order of South’s List, and it will be noticed 
how readily the eye can “ spot ” each Acidalia (Leptomeris) as it lights 
upon it. 
The genus is nearly cosmopolitan, and equally well-defined wherever 
it occurs, whether one works from the venation, the 2 hindleg, the 
genitalia, or the larva. The last two statements are probably safe, 
though they sound very rash in view of the extremely limited inform¬ 
ation on which they are based. But I have submitted to Mr. Burrows 
a few representatives from very remote localities — A. napariata, Guen., 
from Paraguay, A. imbella, Warr., from Japan, A. optivata, Walk., 
from Brisbane, A. minora'ta, Boisd., from Cape Colony — and as they 
have stood the test, it is not likely that the North American or Indian 
representatives will fail. # As regards the larvfe, there are a few good 
descriptions by Dyar in the American periodicals, which seem to work 
out all right, and my friend, Mr. Frank Littler, of Launceston, 
Tasmania, reared one of his species (A. perlata, Walk.) from the egg, 
and kindly sent me some notes which satisfy me that it, too, is in its 
right place in this genus. 
xx. 
