MICROPALPUS.—TRICHOPHORA. 35 
The Central-American collections before me contain one female and five male 
specimens. On comparing these with European examples I cannot find any essential 
difference between them, except that some of the former show a slight transition to a 
rufous coloration of the tibiee and of the basal joints of the antenne. This agrees with 
the indications of Robineau-Desvoidy respecting his Linnemyia distincta, which was 
from Philadelphia. 
TRICHOPHORA. 
Trichophora, Macquart, Dipt. Exot., Suppl. ii. p. 62 (1847). 
Macquart has characterized Trichophora as follows :—‘‘ Proboscis reaching beyond the head, slender, and bent 
downwards; terminal lips small and rather indistinct. Palpi very short or absent. Face bare, the 
epistoma projecting; a strong bristle on the interior and inferior borders of the eyes. Front rather 
broad (2); bristles descending to the lower third of the face, three beneath the base of the antenne. 
Antenne inclined; the second joint rather elongate (the third broken off). Eyes bare. Abdomen oblong, 
very short ; bristles on the middle of the segments ; oviduct terminated by a crown of bristles.” 
This genus is so nearly allied to Cyphocera, Macq. (Ann. Soc. Ent. Fr. ii. 3, p. 267), 
that I almost hesitate to assign the three following species either to Cyphocera or 
to Trichophora. 
Schiner (Reise d. Novara, Zool. iii., Dipt. p. 330), on account of Trichophora analis, 
and after having described two exotic species of Cyphocera, calls Trichophora a well- 
marked genus; but he does not mention the characters by which the two genera may 
be distinguished from each other. All the species of Cyphocera, as well as those of 
Trichophora, have one or more genal bristles, and the palpi absent, or at least 
rudimentary. 
Having no typical specimens of these genera at my disposal, I can only establish 
my opinion upon the descriptions. The type of Cyphocera (C. ruficornis, Macq.) has 
Echinomyia-like antenne (the third joint shorter than the second), and this is not the 
case in any of the species before me. Truly Macquart makes no mention (in his 
description of the genus Trichophora) of the relative length of the antennal joints, 
because the third joint was broken off in his unique specimen; but in none of my 
species is the third joint shorter than the second. Consequently they cannot be 
included in the genus Cyphocera, and I may be correct when I place them in the 
genus T'richophora, 
Trichophora has hitherto contained but two species—T. nigra, Macq. (Dipt. Exot., 
Suppl. ii. p. 63. 1, t. 3. f 7), from Brazil, and J. analis, Schin. (Reise d. Novara, Zool. 
iii., Dipt. p. 330. 115), from South America, both having a dark coloration, with black 
or piceous legs. One of the following new species, 7’. rufina, has a quite different 
coloration, being rufous with similarly coloured antenne and legs; but it agrees with 
the two above-mentioned insects in having macrochete on the middle of the second 
and third abdominal segments. 7. ¢risetosa and T. nitidifrons have no discal macro- 
cheete on the second and third segments; the former has three genal bristles. 
The characters of the genus 7richophora, as they are established by Macquart, ought 
f2 
