474 C. R. OSTEN SACKEN'S PRODROME 



T. duplex (List, etc., I, p. 173, T. imiUois; naiue cliaiiged, ibid., Y, p. 173; Iludsoii's Bay Territory). I 



cannot identify it. 

 T. frontalis (List, etc., I, p. 172 ; Nov.i Scotia). Said to be allied to No. 48, T. affiius Kirby, but will 



be difficult to identity from the description. 

 71 /M/yo/mfer (List, etc., L P- 181; Illinois). In the British Museum a single very bad and indistinct 



specimen. The description is absolutely unmeaning. 

 T. incisus (Dipt. Saund., p. 26; Cape Breton). L^nknown; the .abdomen must be somewhat like that of T. 



lineola. 

 T. intermedius (List, etc., I, p. 173 ; Hudson's Bay Territory; male and female). Unknown. 

 T. leucomelas (List, etc., I, p. 175 ; Georgia). Description very unmeaning ; in coloring it seems to be 



like my T. socins, or like 7'. vicinus Macq. 

 T. miUatus (Dipt. Satind., I, p. 23; United States). The description suggests T. costalis Wied., or some 



species closely resembling it, but larger. 

 T. imtulKs (List, etc., I, p. 175 ; Georgia). I do not know this species. 



T. 2yruximiis (List, etc., I, p. 147 ; Florida) is ten lines long ; very probably described from an unrecog- 

 nizable .S]5ecimen of some well known species. 

 T- rccedchs (List, etc., I, p. 147; Florida). Must be like my No. 5, T. catenatus, perhaps the same. 

 T. rufof rater (Dipt. Saunders, I, p. 26 ; Georgia). Very incomplete description, perhajis my No. 13, 



T. ttner. 

 T. scitus (List, etc., I, p. 181) comes nearest to my No. 42, T. cerastes, on account of the structure of 



the antennae ; in other res]>ects the descri|)tion is unmeaning. 

 T. triligutus (List, etc., V, p. 183 ; Arctic America); apparently a somewhat smaller specimen of No. 48, 



T. affiais Kiibj'. The description of antennas and palpi, and of the brownish coloring, excludes the 



synonymy of No. 40, T. socius. 



Additions to Part I of the Prodrome of the Tabanid.e of the United States. 



Chrysops imdlcus (page 381). Throe female specimens from Ft. Capron, Florida, April 

 11, 12 (collected by Messrs. Hubbard and Schwartz), do not seem to differ from my other 

 specimens ; only the distal mai-gin of the crossband of the wing is straighter, and not 

 slightly sinuate in the third posterior cell, as I find it in niy typical specimens. 



Two females fi-om Sag Harbor, Long Island (caught by mj-self in July, 1875), have an 

 altorjetJier black frontal callosUij ; the coloring of the body and wings is darker and more, 

 intense, and the outlines of the abdominal spots and the design of the wings are better 

 defined. In other respects the agreement with the topical specimens is perfect. 



Chri/sops morosus (page 389). Three females and a male from Florida (Cedar Keys, 

 June 4 ; Ft. Capron, April 9 ; Imlian River, April) do not show any trace of yellow abdom- 

 inal stripes, and agree in this respect with the specimens mentioned in Part I, p. 390. 

 I think now that such specimens belong to C morosus, which would in this case occur 

 as often with as without yellow stripes on the abdomen. 1 also feel more inclined now 

 than before, to identify this species with C. lugens Wied. 



Chrysops frujldus, female (page 384). Varieties occur in which the red of the abdo- 

 men prevails at the expense of the black. An extreme case of this kind was communicated 

 to me by Mr. Dimmock, in which even the focial callosities were reddish. In this speci- 

 men the second segment was altogether reddish, except a small subtriangular spot in the mid- 

 dle ; the two following segments were blackish along their antei'ior margin only ; the last 

 three segments, although black, were laterally and j^osteriorly margined with yellow. For 



