E. T. CRESSON, JR. 55 



caused some confusion regarding the origin of the name. In 

 1860, in the Annals Socicte Entoniologique de la France,'' a hst 

 of the publication of C. Dumeril is given. The third title there 

 is "Exposition d' un Methode Naturelle pour Tetude et la classi- 

 fication des insectes. Magas. encycl., tom. 4, p. 433, an VI 

 (1798)." The reference is evidently to Millin's Magazine En- 

 cj^clopedique, a full set of which is in the library of the Academy 

 of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. I am unable to find any 

 such reference as given above, but in volume four of the sixth 

 series, on page 446, that title appears. Unfortunatel}^ the name, 

 although used in the generic sense, is in the French vernacular, 

 Tetanocere, and cannot be considered in generic nomenclature. 

 The date of this volume is "AN IX— 1801." The magazine was 

 published in annual series of six volumes each, each series desig 

 nated "Annee," so that the mistake in dates evidently occurred 

 from the confusion of An (Annee) with AN (the year of the French 

 Republic) in the references given in the bibliographical data. 

 The citation should read: (6), iv, 446, 1801, or some may prefer. 

 An. 6, Vol. iv, p. 446, AN IX (1801). The date of the supposed 

 appearance of the name should be 1801 instead of 1798. Osten 

 Sacken published a note** regarding Dumeril's work, which is, 

 apparently, the only detailed reference to this particular article. 

 In this he refers to a special author's edition of the article dated 

 1798. If such an edition was issued, and the latin terminology 

 is used, we may be able to retain the old, well-established name 

 for this genus. The earliest use of the name Tetanocera, in the 

 pure latin form, as a generic name, is by Latreille in 1804. ^ Under 

 the diagnosis of the genus is cited Musca graminum Fabricius 

 as the only species. This species is now the genotype of Dorycera 

 Meigen (1830) of the Ortalidae, which fact will, unfortunately, 

 exclude the name Tetanocera from the Sciomyzidae. There 

 seems to be no other available name for this genus, as at present 

 understood, so I propose Chaetomacera, with Musca elata Fabricius 

 (1781) as the genotype. 



Synopsis of Generic Characters. — In this genus the ocellar 

 bristles are present; the meso- and pteropleura are bare, and the 



" (3), viii, 651, 1860. 



« Verb. K. K. Zool.-Bot. Gesell. Wien, 1, 450, 1900. 



9 Nouv. Diet. Hist. Nat., xxiv, tab. meth., 196. 



TRANS. AM. ENT. HOC, XLVI. 



