Aphiochaeta. 207 



and from sick and dead larvæ of Stilpnotia salicis, and finally I possess 

 pulicaria bred from Vespa media^ from a dead Carabus hortensis and 

 from decaying larvæ and pupæ of Depressaria nervosa. 



From the above it is evident that the larvæ feed on decomposing 

 animal and vegetable matters, and the species seem to be rather 

 polyphagous as the same species has often been bred from various 

 substances, both vegetable and animal. On account of cases where the 

 species have been bred from insects, it has been suggested that they 

 were parasites, but in all or most cases it seems probable that the in- 

 sects have been sick or dead before the attack; in one case, however, 

 true parasitism seems to be beyond doubt, viz as regards the American 

 species A. juli Brues parasiting on myriapods (Knab, Insecut. Insc. 

 Menstr. I, 1913, 24), and A. rata once has been recorded as bred from 

 a living larva of Clerus formicariiis (se Schmitz, Zool. Jahrb. Syst. 

 37, 1914, 553), but, according to the above, this species is, at all events 

 generally, not parasitic, perhaps the Cleriis-\dir\di has been sick. — 

 As remarked only few larvæ have been described; Bouché (Natur- 

 gesch. d. Ins. 1834, 102) extremely briefly describes the larva and 

 pupa of A. sordida Zett. ? {heracleellae)\ Leon Dufour (Ann. d. se. 

 nat. Zool. 2, XII, 1839, 54) describes and figures larva and pupa of 

 A. rufipes (pallipes) and 1840 (Mém. Soc. Roy. des se. de l'agr. et des 

 arts de Lille, 416) he describes and figures larva and pupa of A. piisilla 

 {nigra); Bouché (Stett. Ent. Zeitg. VIII, 1847, 146) gives a very 

 short description of the larva of rufipes; Gimmerthal (Arbeit. naturf. 

 Ver. Riga I, 1848, 324) mentions and figures larva and pupa of rufipes 

 {annulata)\ Heeger (Sitzungsber. kais. Akad. d. Wissensch. math. 

 nat. Cl. Wien, X, 1853, 170) describes and figures the developmental 

 stages of the same species; Keilin thinks that the author has mis- 

 taken the larva, and that the pupa may belong to another species; 

 Perris (Ann. Soc. Ent. de Fr. 4, X, 1870, 354) describes and figures 

 the stages of A. pusilla; Schnabl (Deutsch. Entom. Zeitschr. XX, 

 1876, 217) describes and figures larva and pupa of A. rufipes, the 

 pupa is no doubt correct, but a sole glance at the figures of the larva 

 shows that it is the larva of a Muscid, as already stated by Keilin; 

 Hubbard describes (Arner. Ent. III, 1880, 34) a larva, which, accord- 

 ing to Brues, (Bull. Wisc. Nat. Hist. Soc. IV, 1906, 101) is probably 

 A. carernicola Brues; Kiefer (111. Zeitschr. fiir Entom. V, 1900, 241) 

 describes the larva of rufipes, Keilin is inclined to think that this 

 larva may belong to another species; Keilin (Bull. Soc. France Bel- 

 gique (7), 45, 1911) very thoroughly describes and figures larvæ and 



