The text below is grayed out because it is not intended to be read. It is a necessarily imperfect OCR of the original and is only used by a search engine.
74
Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society
elapsed between photography of the plates and their production for the book, however; some moths appear more grayish green or duller than specimens with which I compared their published likenesses. Having had similar disappointments with color registry, I am sure Ferguson must be equally disappointed that the lovely green colors did not come out as well in production as one would wish.
This is a well written and illustrated book which enables one to identify usually by superficial features the North American Geometrinae. It also contains considerable information additional to that in Ferguson's earlier revision, plus variation represented in the color plates by multiple illustrations of some species (six of N. elja, for example). It is a worthy addition to the MONA series, and a fitting fascicle to commemorate the life and contributions of Dick Dominick.
Charles V. Covell Jr., Department of Biology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40292.
Fascicle 7.1. Gelechioidea, Gelechiidae (Part), Dichomeridinae, by Ronald W. Hodges. 1986. 195 pp., 4 color & 34 monochrome pis. Soft cover. $70.
This volume presents the first revision of any large group of North American Gelechiidae in contemporary times, and as such, it brings welcome order to part of a family of small moths whose classification is chaotic at best. The fauna covered is small, however, in relation to the size of the family: 84 species out of possibly 1500+ on this continent. Three genera are recognized (one is monobasic), with most species (74) placed in Di-chomeris. How confused the group was previously is reflected in the 81 generic synonyms under Dichomeris, 60 of which are new or revised. The generic synonymy will prove especially useful because it is worldwide in scope. Also noteworthy in the treatment of one genus, Helcystogramma, is a list of extralimital (non-North American) species. Unfortunately, a similar list is not included for the larger genus Dichomeris, presumably for reasons of length (it includes several hundred species worldwide). The number of new species, 42 or 50% of taxa treated, is a fair reflection of how poorly North American gelechiids are known.
Because this is the first MONA fascicle to treat gelechiids, family and subfamilies are defined. Only three subfamilies are recognized, with Gelechiinae being vastly enlarged to include the majority of our gelechiids. It is quite probable that this assemblage of taxa comprising several thousand species worldwide is defined by primitive character states, and that it will eventually be broken up into monophyletic units. Nevertheless, Hodges must be praised for attempting to delineate precisely the notoriously ill-defined higher categories of gelechiids.
Keys based on external features are given for Dichomeris and Helcystogramma species. They do not permit the separation of all species, however, because several species are distinguished with certainty by genitalia only. This is an unavoidable fact of many microlepidoptera groups, at least until distributions and natural histories become better known. For Dichomeris species, there are also keys based on male and female genitalia.
Species descriptions are lengthy and detailed. They could have been shortened to conserve space and improve readability by deleting unnecessary details of color. For many species, genitalia receive only a brief reference to a figure. It would have been more useful to give distinctive, comparative features because of their importance for species separation. Perhaps this was omitted on account of lepidopterists who dislike or are unable to make genitalia preparations. However, it is likely that whoever is interested in these small moths will also get involved in the techniques required for their study. This notwithstanding, omission of genitalia comparisons partly defeats the purpose of including plates showing genitalia of all species treated because the reader is often left trying to figure out what detectable differences in the figures have taxonomic value. Systematists with a phylogenetic bent will be pleased to find a table of character states that covers 38 characters, albeit nonpolarized, for the 20 species groups of Dichomeris.
The four color plates are stunningly sharp—an improvement over previous fascicles
Volume 43, Number 1
75
on oecophorids and cosmopterigids in which the pictures were slightly fuzzy. The line drawings are of fine quality, although several genitalia illustrations lack contrast between membranous and sclerotized parts, giving the impression that these structures are somewhat uniformly sclerotized. The 34 monochrome plates illustrating male and female genitalia are generally of excellent quality. Hodges is to be praised for doing such a fine job at the very difficult task of microphotography. However, the shortcomings of using photographs to illustrate genitalia are apparent in discrepancies in slide quality, mostly brought out by different staining intensities. Some genitalia are too dark, and their details obscured. In the aedeagus illustrations, one wonders whether visible differences in the photos represent taxonomic differences or artifacts of preparation. Differences are even more tenuous in female genitalia where one can only guess at the important characters. Loss of resolution has been minimized by using contact prints, which accounts for the large format of photographs and the fact that many are composites of two prints.
As in previous "micro" fascicles, the style resembles more that of a taxonomic revision than a general manual, but this seems to be an unavoidable aspect of treating groups where lack of previous revisionary work and large numbers of undescribed taxa preclude more popular-style treatment.
The author is to be commended for this fine treatment of little known, small moths. Like previous fascicles on microlepidoptera, this one should be on the shelf of any serious student of moths, but given its price, it is hardly a manual for the general lepidopterist.
J.-F. Landry, Agriculture Canada, Biosystematics Research Centre, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0C6, Canada.
Fascicle 15.2. Pyralidae (Part), Phycitinae (Part—Acrobasis and Allies), by H. H. Neunzig. 1986. 114 pp., 5 monochrome & 6 color pis. Softcover. $45.
This is the sixth fascicle on Pyralidae and the first to be written by H. H. Neunzig. In this fascicle, Neunzig does an exhaustive study of the large and complex genus Acrobasis, and allied genera Cryptoblabes, Trachycera, Anabasis, and Hypargyria. There has been much difficulty with the identification of species in this group, in particular those of Acrobasis. Using primarily C. Heinrich (1965, U.S. Natl. Mus. Bull. 207:1-581) as a basis, Neunzig incorporated his own studies on biology and immature stages. In his more comprehensive approach, he examined all available type specimens, studied in detail male antennae, shape of male forewings, color pattern of the undersurface of wings and thorax of males, ventral scale tufts of the eighth abdominal segment of males and females, and male and female genitalia.
Neunzig made significant taxonomic changes, including description of three new species, and placement of 16 new synonyms and 2 new combinations. The 38 species of Acrobasis are divided into 10 species-groups based on adult and immature morphology and biology. A convenient table is provided which gives host plant relations and geographic distributions of the species-groups. Future taxonomic work will be facilitated also by the designation of 18 lectotypes in this fascicle.
Accurate identification is aided by detailed species descriptions, excellent illustrations, and keys to genera, to adults and larvae of Acrobasis, and to adults of Trachycera. Many characters of larvae and adults are nicely shown with 61 line drawings. Included also are drawings of larval frass tubes and pupal chambers for 17 Acrobasis species. Four monochrome plates have very good scanning electron micrographs of male antennal characters. In addition, another monochrome plate shows the black scaling of the undersurface of the wings of six species. As with preceding fascicles of MONA, the fine color plates are a strong contribution to this work. Neunzig shows the variation within species by using 6 color plates and 258 specimens to show 44 species photographed at twice natural size. The specimens are in good to excellent condition (few have missing abdomens). A minor inconvenience is the carryover of the same species to subsequent plates, probably to economize on space and reduce costs.
I noticed one error in the text on page 11: "ZMHB" was used for the Museum Alexander