166 PROCEEDINGS ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY 



which probably has a microtype egg. Masicera is already 

 established as a microtype-egg form. These three genera, as 

 commonly determined on external characters, show all three 

 forms of reproductive habit above outlined. Sturmia is 

 another mixed-reproduction genus, as heretofore accepted, 

 but its type, pupiphaga Rdi., has been shown by Pantel to 

 have the microtype egg, and thus its status is now established. 

 Brauer and von Bergeustamm came nearer to separating these 

 forms correctly on external characters than anyone else, and 

 Coquillett came farthest from it. 



Microphthalma europcea is mentioned by Pantel as having 

 a very long, irregularly coiled, and convoluted uterus contain- 

 ing elongate irregularly disposed eggs. I have already pub- 

 lished the fact that these develop in the uterus to very hairy 

 maggots. 



Psalida (Leucostoma^) analis the author refers to his Group 

 IX along with Alophora and Xysta. I believe that it falls in 

 the Phaniinae with Hemyda, Penthosia, and allies. I have 

 noted the remarkable mandibuliform pincers of the female, 

 but have not had material available for dissection. 



Siphona cristata is referred to the author's Group VI. 

 Dufour observed that it has an incubating uterus. It is re- 

 markable as possessing only two spermathecse. 



Sturmia atropivora is referred also to Group VI. It is not 

 a Sturmia, but has elongate macrotype eggs and probably de- 

 posits maggots. It was designated by Mik as the type of his 

 genus Zygobothria. 



The extremely interesting and instructive details of parasit- 

 ism and host reaction detailed in Chapters II to IV are outside 

 the province of this review, which is intended only to correlate 

 the work of Pantel and Portchiuski with the results so far 

 secured by myself in the investigation of reproductive and 

 early-stage characters that will indicate relationships. 



Finally, the author advises me by letter that Kolodkovosky 

 announced in 1909 the discovery of a second pair of glands 

 arising from the vagina, but in what form or forms he does 

 not state. I have not seen Kolodkovosky's paper. Pantel 

 adds that he has not been able to find any indication of such 

 additional glands in his dissections, and I can add that I have 

 not met with any sign of them in my own work. 



In this same connection it is fitting to refer back a full 

 quarter century to J. Portchinski's work on necrophagous and 

 coprophagous muscid larvae published in 1885, and reviewed 

 by Osten-Sacken in 1887, in the Berliner Entomologische 

 Zeitschrift. Several most important points in the reproduc- 

 tion of groups of Muscidae are there brought out. 



