SARCOPHAGA AND ALLIES 9 



this series that they can be separated only by the male 

 genitaha, and probably a dozen of them can scarcely 

 be separated at all in the female. It would seem like 

 an over refinement of classification if we could deter- 

 mine the genus only by the female genitalia, and the 

 species only by those of the male; still more so as in 

 this group it is almost impossible to tell which male 

 goes with which female. We must take the species 

 as nature makes them, but fortunately nature rarely 

 makes genera, leaving that usually to the convenience 

 of the taxonomist. I am not aware of any diagnostic 

 characters for Bl^esoxipha in the male sex. 



Ravinia (Desvoidy, Dipt. Env. Paris, ii, 434, 

 1863; Parker, Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., 35, 52, 

 1914) has for its principal character the course of the 

 frontal bristles, which diverge anteriorly but little, or 

 not at all in the females of some species. The type is 

 hccmatodes of Europe, and the nearest allies in the 

 present paper are Nos 49, 117-121, 143-145. The 

 character of the frontal rows is less developed in 

 males, and there are many species of Sarcophaga out- 

 side the group which show it; however, with some 

 other rather minute characters, it marks off a good 

 subgenus. 



Bottcheria (Parker, Proc. Bost. Soc. Nat. Hist., 

 35, 65, 1914) has for its principal character the pres- 

 ence of a third (middle) series of long bristles on the 

 outer side of the hind femur; the ventral plates also 

 do not become successively narrower. Mr. Parker 

 excluded the females from consideration in his papel*, 

 hence did not develop the fact that these are male 

 characters. I do not find any tangible characters 

 which can be applied to both sexes. The type of the 

 genus is latisterna, and the other related forms are 

 cimhicis, hisetosa, taurus, and parheii. The femoral 

 bristles are variable in cimhicis males. While the five 

 species are undoubtedly allied, I doubt if the fact is 

 best expressed by raising them to generic rank. 



Helicobia was proposed by Coquillett (Proc. 

 Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil., 1895, 317) for the species with 



