*COMMENT ~ Character notes. 
 
*CHARACTER NOTES 
#8. Some caution is required in using this character, because (1), the
descriptions refer exclusively to male insects; and (2), the literature
consulted is unconvincing regarding details of non-pectinate forms.
However, since the occurrence of bipectinated antennae is well
documented, and since an insect with bipectinated antennae will
presumably be a male, possession by a specimen of state 4 is certainly a
useful identificatory state. The other states are best avoided for this
purpose. 
#12. Porrect in older literature appears to mean projecting (i.e.,
when the head is viewed from above), so that the descriptions of Newman
\i{}et al.\i0{} cannot be safely interpreted. 
#13. Wingspan: centre of thorax to tip of forewing, multiplied by 2. 
#15. Published descriptions of lepidopteran wing colours are often very
inadequate and misleading, with later efforts often comparing very
poorly with Newman's. For example, compare the latter's pleasant and
genuinely informative word pictures with Meyrick's boring and often
inadequate attempts to be scientific. \par{}Ferrugineous: rust-coloured.
\par{}Fuscous: sombre brownish grey. \par{}Ochreous: pale yellowish- or
orangish-brownish, straw-coloured. \par{}Umber: greenish brown. Burnt
umber: dark (as if charred) greenish brown. 
#16. Published descriptions of lepidopteran wing colours are often very
inadequate and misleading, with later efforts often comparing very
poorly with Newman's. For example, compare the latter's pleasant and
genuinely informative word pictures with Meyrick's boring and often
inadequate attempts to be scientific. \par{}Ferrugineous: rust-coloured.
\par{}Fuscous: sombre brownish grey. \par{}Ochreous: pale yellowish- or
orangish-brownish, straw-coloured. \par{}Umber: greenish brown. Burnt
umber: dark (as if charred) greenish brown. 
#26. Published descriptions of lepidopteran wing colours are often very
inadequate and misleading, with later efforts often comparing very
poorly with Newman's. For example, compare the latter's pleasant and
genuinely informative word pictures with Meyrick's inadequate and boring
attempts to be scientific. \par{}Ferrugineous: rust-coloured.
\par{}Fuscous: sombre brownish grey. \par{}Ochreous: pale yellowish- or
orangish-brownish, straw-coloured. \par{}Umber: greenish brown. Burnt
umber: dark (as if charred) greenish brown. 
#30-33. Wing venation is best viewed from the under-side, where it is
more prominent but may still require removal of the scales. \par{}The
neuration characters and data accumulated here were taken primarily from
Meyrick (1927). Unsurprisingly (see below), cross referencing the
resulting descriptions in detail with Imms (1957), Le Cerf and Herbulot
(1948), and Common (1970) has resulted in considerably increasing the
levels of intra-taxon variation encoded. \par{}The abstruse descriptive
terminologies for lepidopteran venation employed in modern entomological
text-books represent attempts to standardise across all the insect
groups, and involve entangling the descriptive process with phylogenetic
hypotheses of doubtful validity. The simpler system presented by Meyrick
(1927), which is easier to apply to a specimen in practice, is used
here. He provides a wealth of comparative data and drawings of neuration
for British Lepidoptera, presumably reflecting his own efforts at
consistent interpretion. However, the requirement to identify veins with
his standard numbering still involves recognising veins that are
missing with reference to the standard (cf. the diagram accessible
via the Lepidopteran morphology toolbar button). Also, in the absence
of precise definitions, there are evident difficulties in making the
required distinctions between tubular veins and their vestigial
(reduced, obsolescent, obsolete, etc.) manifestations. Contrasting
interpetations by different authorities of neuration patterns for the
same species are common. The available data are evidently untrustworthy,
and since neuration characters are inconvenient for application, their
frequent use at critical positions in professional printed keys is
unfortunate. 
#51-52. Bradley (2000) details in precise terms the national status of many
species, including those here tagged adventive. The term as used here
denotes not native to this environment, and includes species usually
indicated in check lists as of doubtful British status. Assignment is
inevitably somewhat arbitrary, because situations where specimens have
been rarely but genuinely found at large in the British Isles as a
result of migrations beyond the normal range of a species, or of
accidental transport by human agencies, are hard to disentangle from
honest but erroneous records and cases of fraud. Migrant species
recorded regularly in Britain as adults but which are unable breed
successfully there are treated as native in this connection. 
#55. Complete lists of species and genera are given here, cf. Bradley et
al. (1972) and Bradley (2000). 
