[Berliner Entomolos. Zeitsclirift P.d. XL. Jnlirg. ]S<I5, Tieft III. ] ;!:)! 



Supplement 

 to my recent paper on Liponeuridae 



bj- C. R. Osten Sachen. 



Imniediately after tlie publieation of my paper: „Contribntions 

 to tlie study of the Liponeuridae Loew" (Berl. Ent. Z. Vol. XL, 

 ISii.^), p. 148). I inserted in the Ent. Montlily Mag. London, May 

 ISO;'), p. 118 the following short notice: 



„I deeni it my duty formally to retract my recommendation of 

 a change of name for the Family Blepharo ceridae, which, npon 

 Loew's initiative, I introduced in my recent paper in the Berl. Ent. 

 Zeit. 189.'), p. 148. I have since received a letter from Prof. Mik 

 (of Vienna) who called my attention to the fact that Loew was mis- 

 taken in his Statement about the perfect structural identity of the 

 antennae of Liponevra and Blepharocera. In examining the an- 

 tcnnae of the latter genus under a Compound microscope, Mik dis- 

 covered in the female specimens a row of minute hairs on one side 

 of the antennae, which does not exist in Lip., and justify the name 

 bcstowed by Macquart npon the genus Blepharocera. which means 

 „provided witli ciliated antennae". Macquart actually described 

 and figured this character, which, owing to its minuteuoss, has been 

 overlooked since. The name of the genus being thus vindicated, 

 there is no reason to change the Family name, derived from the 

 earliest published genus. (Thus Asilidae is derived from Asühs, 

 without any particular etymological meaning being connected with 

 the Family-name.) As a staunch friend of continuity in the matter 

 of entomological nomenclature, I accept this Solution as most welcome. 



For the present I confine myself to this short Statement, but I 

 hope soon to publish a more elaborate discussion of the facts of the 

 case, as well as some details about the structure of the two genera, 

 communicated to me by Prof. Mik. In justice to myself, I must 



