138 
Journal of Agricultural Research 
Vol. XXIX, No. 3 
saw the destruction which this pest i s 
capable of causing. In this instanc e 
the entire crop of chrysanthemums in 
two houses was a complete loss. Dur¬ 
ing 1921 the leaf-tyers were reported as 
common in greenhouses throughout the 
Middle West and at Flint, Mich., where, 
they caused severe injury to cinerarias. 
FOOD PLANTS 
Among the preferred hosts the fol¬ 
lowing flowering and ornamental plants 
most susceptible to their attacks may 
be listed: Common chrysanthemum 
(■ Chrysanthemum hortorum), cineraria 
{Senecio cruentus ), violet ( Viola tri¬ 
color ), rose ( Rosa spp.), carnation ( Di- 
anthus caryophyllus), calendula (pot- 
marigold) ( Calendula officinalis), sweet 
pea ( Lathyrus odoratus ), marguerite 
{Chrysanthemum frutescens), geranium 
{Pelargonium hortorum), snapdragon 
{Antirrhinum spp.). 
In addition, they are more or less in¬ 
jurious to primrose {Primula spp.), 
ageratufrx {Ageratum houstonianum), 
marigold {Tagetes spp.), heliotrope 
{Heliotropium peruvianum), common 
petunia (Petunia hybrida), begonia {Be¬ 
gonia spp.), canna {Canna indica), 
dahlia ( Dahlia rosea), wallflower {Chei- 
ranthus sp.), ;nasturtium {Tropaeolum 
spp.), abutilon {Abutilon spp.), cycla¬ 
men {Cyclamen persicum), anemone 
{Anemone japonica), sage {Salvia offici¬ 
nalis), moonflower {Colonyction acule- 
atum), azalea {Azalea spp.), sultan 
snapweed {Impatiens sultana), spider- 
wort {Tradescantia fluminensis), blessed 
thistle {Cnicus benedictus), kenilworth- 
ivy {Linaria cymbalaria), ivy groundsel 
{Senecio mikanioides), ground-ivy {Ne- 
peta hederacea), passion flower ( Passi- 
flora caerulea), feverfew camomile {Ma¬ 
tricaria parthenoides), plumbago {Plum¬ 
bago capensis), redspray ruellia {Ruellia 
amoena), {Tydaea) Isoloma ocellatum, 
lobelia {Lobelia erinus), speedwell {Ve¬ 
ronica spp.), common lantana {Lantana 
camara), slender deutzia {Deutzia gra¬ 
cilis), goatsrue senna-pea {Swainsona 
galegifolia), China aster {Callistephus 
chinensis), coleus ( Coleus blumei), fuch¬ 
sia {Fuchsia speciosa [hybrida]), Justicia 
furcata, canary broom {Cytisus cana- 
riensis). 
DISTRIBUTION 
The greenhouse leaf-tyer is widely 
distributed throughout the United 
States, Canada, Central America, and 
South America, and is definitely re* 
ported as occurring in the District of 
Columbia and in the following States: 
Alabama, California, Colorado, Con¬ 
necticut, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, 
Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mas¬ 
sachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Mis¬ 
souri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New 
York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, 
Pennsylvania, Texas, Vermont, Vir¬ 
ginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. 
SYNONYMY • . 
Since 1854, when this American 
species was originally described by 
Guen^e {8, p. 898 ) 4 as Scopula rubigalis r 
it has frequently been confused with 
the closely related European species 
known as Phlyctaenia lerrugalis Htibner- 
Botys oblunalis, described by Lederer 
{10, p. 489), and Botis harveyana, 
described by Grote (7, p. 104-105) in 
1877, were regarded by Hampson as 
synonymous with the American species. 
In 1899 Hampson {9, p. 248, 248) 
catalogued Pionea rubigalis and Pionea 
ferrugalis as distinct species. Two 
years later both Slingerland {13, p . 
159) and Chittenden {8, p. 7) used the 
name Phlyctaenia rubigalis in describ¬ 
ing the greenhouse species. In 1902,. 
however, Fernald {in Dyar, 5, p. 887) 
reduced all these species to synonymy 
with Hiibner’s ferrugalis, a classifica¬ 
tion which has since been followed in 
economic literature down to the present 
time. Barnes and McDunnough in 
1917 {1, p. 183) also regarded the two 
species as identical. The specimens 
used in these experiments have been 
identified by Messrs. Busck and Hein¬ 
rich as Phlyctaenia rubigalis Guen6e. 
The following are the more im¬ 
portant references to Phlyctaenia rubi¬ 
galis, and its synonyms: 
Scopula rubigalis Guen6e, 1854, Spec. 
Gen. 8: 398. 
Botys oblunalis Lederer, 1863, Wien. 
Ent. Monatschr., 7: 372, 469. 
Botis harveyana Grote, 1877, Canad. 
Ent., 9: 104-105 
Pionea rubigalis Hampson, 1899,. 
Proc. Zool. Soc. London f. 1899, p. 242. 
Phlyctaenia rubigalis Chittenden,. 
1901, U. S. Dept. Agr., Div. Ent. Bui. 
27, p. 7; Slingerland, 1901, N. Y. 
Cornell Agr. Exp. Sta. Bui. 190, p. 159. 
Phlyctaenia ferrugalis Fernald, 1902,. 
not Hubner, in Dyar’s List N. Amer. 
Lep., p. 387; Barnes and McDunnough, 
1917, not Hubner, Check List Lep. 
Bor. Amer., p. 133. 
4 Reference is made by number (italic) to “ Literature cited ” p. 158. 
