OF WASHINGTON, VOLUME XIII, I'll I. 169 



self uncertain as to their distinctness. One of these might 

 easily be the Crimean and Caucasian form observed by Port- 

 chinski as carrying the maggot to the third stage in the uterus. 

 The fact that this form omitted the second maggot stage in 

 utero, on the contrary, makes it possible that both were the 

 same. At all events, fcumiisca corrina is established as pos- 

 sessing an incubating uterus, and is thus entirely distinct 

 from Musca. I believe that it forms a connecting link be- 

 tween the Muscinae and the Mesernbrininae. 



Portchinski further found that Pyrellia serena and Graph- 

 oinyia maculata deposit a small number of large eggs, which 

 he states not to exceed 44 in number. Both evidently belong 

 to the Mesembrininae. 



Myiospila meditabunda and Spilogaster angelica lay not 

 over two dozen large eggs, while Spilogaster divisa and Hy- 

 lemyia strigosa are viviparous. The egg of Myiospila medi- 

 tabunda at least has the curved appendage noted in the de- 

 posited egg of Eumusca corvina. The maggot of Hylem yia 

 strigosa develops singly, rarely two at a time, in the uterus and 

 is deposited in its first stage, but as a very large maggot which 

 passes rapidly through its second and third stages. These 

 are all coprophagous and seem to belong in the Anthomyioidea, 

 but may yet prove to have greater affinity with the Muscoidea. 



Portchinski also states that what has been called Dasyphora 

 lasiophthalma deposits eggs. It is therefore not Dasyphora, 

 and may be called Eudasyphora. Most of the species of 

 Hylemyia deposit eggs, and if the type species, strenua R. D., 

 is among these then strigosa will need a new generic name. 

 I am perfectly aware that coprophagousness tends toward 

 viviparousness, as witness the case of Chironomus sterco- 

 nirins, now referred to Orthocladius, which is coprophagous, 

 and one of the few viviparous Nemocera. Other copropha- 

 gous Nemocera, however, appear to retain the habit of ovi- 

 position. In any event, such wide deviation in reproductive 

 habit implies at least generic distinctness, if not tribal. 



Portchinski's work marks an extremely important epoch in 

 the progress of muscoid investigations. 



I give below formal announcement of the new genera men- 

 tioned in the preceding remarks, with their type species. 



Euxysta, nov. gen. 



Proposed for A'ysta semicana Egger in the sense of Pantel 

 (1910). Believed to deposit flattened oval macrotype eggs on 

 host. 



