248 DIPTERA OF NORTH AMERICA. [PART IV. 



The two species of the first group {E. spinosa and longicornis) 

 are most closely allied, which is proved by the analogous struc- 

 ture of their antennae, and the resemblance of the coloring and 

 of the whole bearing of the insects. Nevertheless, one has four 

 and the other five posterior cells, which shows the secondary im- 

 portance of this character in the present group. The two other 

 species have four posterior cells. 



No true Eriocera has been discovered in Europe yet (the 

 closely allied genus PentJioptera, however, occurs both in^urope 

 and in North America). But in the warmer latitudes of Asia, 

 Africa, and America, Eriocera seems to be one of the most 

 abundantly represented genera of Tipulidse hrevipalpi. I was 

 struck with this in looking over the principal collections in 

 Europe; some of the species, however, may be more related to 

 Pentlioptera. The following historical account of the genus 

 Eriocera contains the list of species described by former authors, 

 as far as I have been able to ascertain their relationship. 



Wiedemann's Limnohia basilaris, acrodacta, and probably 

 mesopyrrha, all from Java ; L. caminaria, erythrocephala, and 

 *nigra, from Brazil, are Eriocerse. 



The genus Eriocera (from i'ptov, wool, and xipa^, horn) w^as first 

 introduced by Macquart in the Dipteres Exotiques, etc. Vol. I, 

 p. li, Tab. X, fig. 2. This author was struck by the abnormal 

 number of antennal joints of Limnohia nigra Wied., and founded 

 the genus principally upon this character ; but that he did not 

 realize the true character of the genus he was establishing, 

 results from the fact, that in the same volume (1. c. p. 6 '7) he de- 

 scribes Eriocera erythrocephala Wied. and Eriocera acrostacta 

 Wied. as Cylindrotomse, upon the ground of the cylindrical 

 shape of the joints of the flagellum ; the abnormal number of 

 antennal joints he explains away in both cases»by the supposition 

 that the ends were broken off. Moreover, he had another Erio- 

 cera, likewise with four posterior cells {E. hituherculata, from 

 Brazil), but the antennce of the specimen were entirely broken 

 off ; this species he placed, on account of its four posterior cells, 

 in the genus Limnohia (1. c. p. 12). He had done the same in 

 his earlier work, with his Limnohia diana, from Bengal (Hist. 

 Natur. Dipjt. 1, p. lOY), which is likewise an Eriocera with four 

 posterior cells. His Lininopjhila hicolor, from Bengal, Dipt. Exot. 

 Vol. I (antenna3 also broken), is apparently an Eriocera, put 



