100 PROCEEDINGS ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY 



twice, in two zones; setigera oregonensis twice, in two zones; 

 clistoides twice, in two zones; mesensis once, necessarily in one zone; 

 sierricola twice, in one zone; robusta once, necessarily in one 

 zone; ruficornis twice, in two zones; nigrifrons several times, 

 through a range of five zones; globosa several times, through a 

 range of five zones. Looking at the facts from this point of 

 view, one would hesitate to say, "The impress of the environ- 

 ment is upon each of them." 



In discussion of this paper Dr. Townsend presented the fol- 

 lowing : 



NOTE ON MYIOPHASIA AENEA WD. 



BY CHARLES H. T. TOWNSEND. 



Dr. Aldrich has kindly sent me letter received from Dr. H. 

 Zerny, of the Vienna Museum, giving certain structural details 

 of the holotype of this species, together with a drawing show- 

 ing venation and side view of head. The holotype is a male. 

 In my synopsis of the Myiophasia group published in the Pro- 

 ceedings of the Society last year, the characters furnished by 

 Zerny lead unmistakably to couplet 11, and there agrees with 

 Phasiodista in the absence of median marginal macrochaetae on 

 second abdominal segment. But otherwise they agree with 

 Myiophasia and not with Phasiodista. Males of the form given 

 as Phasiodista metallica in my synopsis, from the Atlantic coast 

 region, show the front not produced in profile and the hind cross- 

 vein normally in middle between small crossvein and bend of 

 fourth vein. The drawing by Zerny shows the front well pro- 

 duced and the hind crossvein nearer to bend of fourth vein (20 

 mm. from small crossvein and 13 mm. from bend), agreeing per- 

 fectly with males of Myiophasia setigera from the western moun- 

 tain region (New Mexico). 



The information supplied by Zerny is thankfully received, but 

 does not decide the matter. The lack of bristles on second seg- 

 ment of Wiedemann's holotype may be abnormal. A good series 

 of specimens from Montevideo, the holotype locality, as well as 

 further study of the holotype in connection with same, will be 

 absolutely necessary to decide the question. In any event, the 

 characters furnished by Zerny show that aenea Wd. is not con- 

 specific with metallica Towns., and hence will need a new name, 

 as it is preoccupied by Tachina aenea Mg. (1824). 



In this connection, I note that my original description of 

 Phasiodista metallica does not agree fully with the specimens of 

 the form given under that name in the above-mentioned synopsis. 



