Notes on synonymy and larvae of Pyralidae

158 ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY

NOTES ON SYNONYMY AND LARVAE OF PYRALID^E.

By ^{HAKRISON G. DYAR.}

Euzophera

gigantella Ragonot.

Enzopheragigantella Ragonot, Nouv.gen. Phyc. and_{Gall.,p.32, 1888.}

Euzopheraifigantella Ragonot,

Rom.

Mem., vin,p. 51, 1901.

Honora cinerella Hulst. Journ.N. Y. Ent. _{Soc., vui, p.223,} 1901.

Honoracinerella Hulst,Bull. 52, U. S. Nat. Mus., p.433, 1902.

Hulst's 9 type ^isbefore me. Ithas not the contrasts of black shades

shown

ⁱⁿ _{Ragonot's figure,*} but these shadesare barely mentioned in the text

and

not at all inthe _originaldescription, ^so

itappears ^{that the} figure ^iseither over colored or

made

from an unusually dark specimen.

The

_{species belongs} to

Euzophera

rather than to

Honora

as the cellof thehind

wings

^is long, beino"

nearly half the length of thewing.

Vitula

serratilineella Ragonot.

Vitula serratilineella Ragonot, Diag. N. A._Phjcit. and _{Gall., p. 115,} 1887.

Vitula serratilineella Hulst, Trans.

Am.

Ent. Soc., xvn, p. 179, 1890.

Eccopisa ^setrattlineclla Ragonot,

Rom.

_{Mem., viu,} pp. 33, 560, 1901;

PI.XLIX, fig. 23.

Vitulaserratilineella Hampson,

Rom.

Mem., vin, p.83, 1901.

Eccopsia serratilineella Hulst,Bull. 52, U. S.Nat.Mus., p. 430, 1902.

Vitulaserratilineella Dyar,^{Proc. Ent. Soc.} Wash.,v, p. 104, 1903.

Not Vitula serratilineella Hampson,

Rom.

Mem.,

vm,

^PI. XLII, fig.

12, 1901.

The

_{speciesbelongs}^{to Vitula}as originallyplaced by Ragonot, since the

^

^has

^none

^{of the peculiar characters described for}

Eccopisa

^Zeller.

Hampson

places^itpositivelyⁱⁿthisgenus,^fbut without

good

^{reason, for he}

had

no

^,

^asthe citations inthetext

show. The

_figure

_(PL

XLIX, fig. 23) ^is a fair representation of the _species,but the second _{figure (PI.} XLII, fig. 12) ^is quite^{a dif} ferent insect, apparentlybelonging ^to another genus,

and

^a male,

ifthe

drawing

^{is to be trusted.}

The

_generic term

Eccopsia

^is

due

to a misreading ^of Dr. Hulst's manuscript ^{or to a clerical} error of his; he evidently intended ^towrite

Eccopisa

^{Zeller. I}

had

to supplythe authors'

names and

the references and, not^find ing Eccopsia, thought ^it one of the

new names

_{being proposed}

by Ragonot

^{in Vol.}

VIII

of the

Romanoff _Memoirs,

not then available.

The

term

Eccopsia

(Ragonot) Hulst ^will be cited as

*Rom.

Mem.,vin, ^PI.xxv, fig. 25.

f

Rom.

Mem.,vin,p. 560, 1901,

OF WASHINGTON. 159

a

synonym

of Vitula, type serratilineella Ragonot.

There

is

no

known American

_{species of}

Eccopisa

^Zeller.

Laetilia ephestiella Ragonot.

Dakruma

ephestiella Ragonot, Diag.

No Am.

_Phycit.and _{Gall., p. 13,} 1887.

Ltztilia ephestiella Hulst, Trans.

Am.

Ent. _Soc.,xvn,p. 185, 1890.

Lasiosticha ephestiella Ragonot,

Rom.

Mem., vui, p. no, 1901, PI. i, fig 3-

Laosticha ephestiellaHulst,Bull. 52, U.S.Nat. Mus., p. 431, 1902.

The name

Laosticha is anothererror in preparingDr. Hulst's manuscript^{for Bulletin} 52-

The name

_originally

communicated

to Dr. Hulst

was

_evidently Lasiosticha Meyrick.

But

^I can see no reason ^for referring theArizonian _species to thisAustralian genus. Lasiosticha is characterized by having^a thick ridge of scales on the

$

^{antennas from base tomiddle,}as stated inthetext ofRagonot's

monograph ^and shown

in the_figure,* while

Rago

not says of ephestiella,

$

antennas simple, ^filiform,feeblypubes cent.

The

venation isstated to be as in coccidivora

Comstock,

but vein 2ofhind

wings

^{a little beforeend ofcell}

and

vein 8very short. I

would

refer it toLcetiliaof

which

Lacsticha (Ragonot) Hulst will

become

a

synonym. The

genus Lasiosticha

Meyrick

should be considered unrepresented ⁱⁿ America.

Pectinigera

ardiferella Hulst.

Al/ootia ardiferella Hulst, Ent.Amer., iv, p.118, 1888.

Altoonaardiferella Hulst, Trans.

Am.

Ent. Soc,xvii, p. 208, 1890.

Tolimaardiferella Ragonot, Romanoff Mem.,

vm,

p. 506, 1901.

Aurora nigromaculella Hulst. Journ. N. Y.Ent. _{Soc., vui,p.224,1901.}

Sahiria ardiferella Hulst, Bull. 52, U. S. Nat. Mus., p. 439, 1902.

This _species cannot belong ^to Tolima, ^{as vein 2} of the hind

wings

^{isdistant from}the angle of the cell, nor to

Aurora,

^asvein 10 of fore

wings

^{is from the cell, norto} Saluria, ^{asthere is}no frontal tubercle.

Altoona

is

made

a

synonym

^of

Tolima by Ragonot,

^{but I have seen} no male and cannot _say

whether

the antennas in this species havea tuft of scales or not. I

assume

that they do, ⁱⁿ placing the species ⁱⁿ Pectinigera, ^asthe posi tion to

which Hampson

assigns the species ⁱⁿ the

Romanoff Memoirs

_implies thatsuch is the case.

Two

^small _specimens ^from

Mr.

T. D.

A.

Cockerell from Mesilla Park,

New Mexico, emerged August

4

and n. They

are labeled asfollows:

"

Bred

from Orthezia

an

nee

on

_Atriplex canescens.

Larva

*

Rom.

_{Mem., vin, p. 109, PI. XLVI,fig. 24, 1901.}

160 ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETT

in

web,

^{8 or} 9

mm.

_long, flead black;

body

^{dull white, the}

piliferoustuberclesdarkbut notvery conspicuous. ^{Firstthoracic}

segment

^dark purplish ^at the _sides, black or nearly so on the dorsum. Thoracic _legsblack." (Cockerell.)

Selagia

^lithosella Ragonot.

Selagia ^lithosella Ragonot, Diag.,N.

Am.

_{Phycit., p. 9, 1887.}

Se.logialithosella. Hulst, Trans.

Am.

Ent. Soc.,xvn, p. 160, 1890.

Selagia^lithosella Ragonot,

Rom.

Mem., vn,p, 474, 1893.

Honora luteella Hulst, Journ. N. Y. Ent. _Soc.,vni, _{p. 223. 1901.}

Sflagia ^lithosella Hulst, ^Bull.52, U. S. Nat. Mus.,p. 426,J9O2.

Honera luteella Hulst, Bull. 52, U. S. Nat.Mus., p. 433, 1902.

Hulst's type of^{luteella is} before

me

and_agreeswith Ragonot's figure of lithosella.

The

_species does not belong ^to

Honora,

having ^{S veins in the} hind wings, but agrees generically with the

European

argyrella Fab., the type of Selagia.

Cacotherapia,

^n. gen.

Fore wings ^{with 12 veins, 2}well before the angle of the^cell, 3 before the angle, 4and ₅ long-stalked, ^cell long, ⁶wellbelow the upperangle, 7 to 10 stalked, 7 to9 ^closetogetherona long stalk, 7 from 8beyond9, 10shortly^stalked,

n

from cell. Hind _wingswith _{7 veins,} 2 from _long before angle ofcell,3 and4 separate,6 from upperangle of^cell, 7 and8 anastomosing, ^the upper ^{veinof the cell}obsolete, resembling ^thediscal vein. Labial_palpi long, porrect; maxillarypalpi and tongue ^invisible;

rfantennae thickened, slightly dentate,^ciliate,a heavyscalingon costaof forewings below ^atbase.

Belongs^tothe Galleriinasnear Antipilotis Meyrick,^butdiffers

in the obsolescence of the tongue, the long porrect palpi,^etc.

Type: Aurora

nigrocinereella ^Hulst.

Cacotherapia nigrocinereella

^Hulst.

Auroranigrocinereella Hulst, Can. _Ent., xxxn, p. 176, 1900.

Aurora nigrocinereella Hulst, Bull. 52,U. 'S. Nat. Mus., p. 438, 1902.

The

_locality

"Texas"

_{given by Hulst} is erroneous.

The

specimens

were

bred from larvae feeding on ^

Lecanium

_sp.,

on

Bigelovia douglassii,

American

_Fork,

Utah

_(E.

A.

_Schwarz).

Received at Dept. Agriculture

June

^22, 1891, issued ^cT

and

9 July 7 and8, 1891

"

(Dept. Agr.,

No.

_5094).

This adds anotherto thelist of carnivorous Lepidoptera.