122 the canadian entomologist 



Notes ox the Genera 



Arctcecia — Includes A consocia Walk. The genus Philarctiis 

 is \ery close and perhaps identical. 



Ilesperophyhix and Allei^ophylax — These were formerly in- 

 cluded in Plulyphylax, but, as already noted by McLachlan and 

 rimer, not congeneric. AUeiiOpliylux also includes P. lepida Hag. 



Eustenace — Includes also the Steiwphyhix '^ciUilis of McLachlan. 



Rhadicoleptus — Our Asytmrclnis fumosus and A. JJavicoUis 

 \\\\\ go in W'allengren's genus, and are ([uitc different in appearance 

 from the typical broad winged Steuopliylax. 



Asynarchus — The type species, A .fusorius. will run to A uabolia, 

 and I see little reason for separating it; vari(^us other species, 

 iteratus, amnrcusis, etc., will aslo go to AnaboJia, but A. ccvnosus 

 runs to Steuopliylax; it should form another genus. 



Clistoronia and Psychoronia include each only a single species. 



Allomyia includes. but one species. 



Dnisiis — In this I include Ilalesiis sparsits Bks. from New- 

 foundland. 



Ilalesus — I do not find any true representatives of this in our 

 fauna; in the above table it would run out near Platycentropus, 

 having ocellar macrocha^tir, and 1, 3, 3 spurs; but the anal area is 

 normall\- di\"ided. 



Ecclisomyia — The Kuropean Ecclisopleryx has sjnirs 1, 2, 3; 

 first fork not so far back on discal cell, and no ocellar macrocha^tio. 



Algonquina, type Parachiona parvida Bks., I propose for 

 several species which I formerly kept in Parachiona, but the latter 

 is quite different. 



Ironoquia — Includes only the one species I have previously 

 placed in Chcetopterygopsis. In this latter genus there are ocellar 

 macrocha>ta\ The genera Ileliconius and Anisitella are really 

 Chcrtopteryi^opsis with a variation in spur formula; they have the 

 same peculiar fore wings, and also ocellar macrochieta'. Caiadice 

 has no ocellar macrocha'ta-. 



Limnephihis — This genus contains by far a larger number of 

 species than any other genus in the family, and several are rather 

 aberrant and show afifinity to Anabolia. Goniotaulius should be 

 maintained, but I have not been able to find characters, except 

 that the ocellar macrocha?ta? are nearer to each other than in the 

 true LimnephUiis. 



