246 [October, 



gaster, Mf/., hut with the eijes separate in both sc.ves, and the posterior orbits 

 not produced into a prominent rid<je in cither sex. 



Ty])e of gcuus, Pachi/gaster vieroiiicJcena, L. Dufour. 



The synonymy will therefore run as follows : — 



NeOPACUYGASTEK MEROMELJiNA, Duf. 



Pachygaster meromelas, L. Dufour, Ann. Sc. Nat., Seconde Serie, T. XVI, p. 



266 (1841). 

 Sargus pachi/gaster, Flu., Stratioinytliu Sueeise, p. 13, 1 (1817), p^. 

 Pachygaster orbitalis, Wahlberg, Ofv. K. Vet.-Akad. Forhandl., Elfte Arg., 



1854, p. 212 (1855). 

 ? Pachygaster argentifer, Jaiimicke, ? , Berl. Ent. Z., X, p. 221 (1866). 

 Pachygaster meromelas, Loew, Zeitselir. f. d. Gcs. Naturwiss., Bd. XXXV, p. 



266 (1870), p/!. 



It is impossible to say definitely whether any other species can 

 at present be assigned to Neop achy (faster. Pachygaster tarsnJis, Ztt., 

 as yet unfortunately unrepresented in our collection, would seem to 

 have a holoptic male, since, although he does not expressly mention 

 the eyes, Zetterstedt, who describes both sexes, states that the species 

 is similar to P. atra. Pachygaster minutissima, Ztt., is stated by 

 its author (Dipt. tScand., viii, p. 2i)Gl) to have the eyes in contact 

 in the male. 



Van der Wulp (" Termeszetrajzi Fiizetek," Bd. xxi [1S98], p. 417), 

 describes the male of his species Pachygaster limhipennis, from New 

 Guinea, as having the eyes almost in contact (" mit fast zusammen- 

 stossenden Augen") ; while in the case of P. lativentris (he. cif., p. 

 416), another new species from the same locality founded on the female 

 ahnie, he states that the front is " very narrow, ex]}anded into a triangle 

 above the antenna;." It is possible that the type of P. lativentris is 

 really a male, and that both of these species should be assigned to 

 Neopachygastcr. A single undetermined specimen in our collection, 

 from Hobart, Tasmania, of large size and perhaps belonging to a 

 species as yet undescribed, may well belong to Neopachygastcr, since, 

 while the eyes are separate, the front is of but moderate width and 

 has the sides parallel, so that the sjiecimen is in all probability a male. 



In concluding this paper I would ask to be allowed to offer my 



congratulations to Dr. ISharp on the discovery of so interesting an 



addition to the British Fauna, and at the same time to ex])ress my 



appreciation of the generous manner in which he has enriched the 



National Collection. 



British Museum (Natural History), 



CrotTiwclI Eoad, London, N.W. : 

 August 15th, 1901. 



