KOTES. 233 



(a very probable one) , that ^Nlacquart overlookeil the spurs on the front 

 tibiae. 



108. Diogmites umbrinus- I am not quite sure whether the speci- 

 men of Daf:i/p. hasaJis Walker, in the Brit. Miis. belongs here or to 

 Diogmites dif^color. 



109. Diogirites annulatus Bij^ot. This species does not belong to 

 Senohasis Macq. from which it differs in the structure of the antennae 

 and of the hypopygium. It may be placed provisionally in the genus 

 Diofjniifcs, however, as a separate section (Loow in litt.). 



110. D. brunneus. Macquart's synonymy is not to be relied on, as 

 he evidently mixed up several species of Diogmites. 



111. D. Duillius. The description seems to betray a Diogmitca, 

 nevertheless certain statements render this interpretation doubtful; hence 

 the isolated position given to this species. (Loew in litt.) 



112. Laphria lata. I have seen the type in Lille and have taken 

 a note, which enabled me to determine a specimen from Louisiana in 

 the. type-collection (now in the M. C. Z.). 



113. Laphria Alcanor Walker, is the variety of L. thomcica which 

 has the intermediate alidominal segments beset with yellow pile. 



114. Laphria affinis Macq., the type of which I saw in Mr. Bigot's 

 collection, looks very much like L. tlioracica in the variety with alto- 

 gether black abdominal pile. The description speaks of icliite hairs 

 about the head, which do not exist in L. tlioracica, but do not shake 

 my belief in the synonym}^ 



lit In the Banksian collection, preserved in the Brit. Mus and 

 containing the types of Fabricius, there is an Asilus; r//-o.s.s"».s, with the 

 reference: Sp(C Iii>i. Nr. 1. The specimen bears a label America, and 

 another label with the word type. This specimen is Laphria tergissa 

 Say. In the Sjiccies Inscdonnn the locality is given simply as „America''', 

 in the »%^f. Aidl. we find „in America meiidionali", evidently a later 

 and probably erroneous addition. In both works however, the „Mnseuin 

 Dom. Banks" is quoted, as containing the type of the description. 



IK). Laphria analis Macq Synonynw hardly doubtful, although 

 Macquart says: „les cinq premiers segments a i)oi!s jaunes". 



117. Laphria fiavihiirbis Harris. The original type still exists in 

 Dr. Harris's collection, in Boston. I do not think that it differs from 

 tergissa. At any rate there is an earlier L. jUiriharhi^t . bj Macquart. 



118. Schiner (1. c. p. 709) places Laphria rubriventris Macq., 

 L. formidolo'a Walk, and xanthocnema Wied. in the genus Andrenosoma. 

 He is wrong about ruhrirenfris v.hich is a Lampria. 



119. The genera of the Asilina are tabulated by Loew in the 

 Linnaea Entom. Ill, p. 402 and IV, p. 148; also later in the Dijitern- 

 Fauna Siidafrika's, p. 143. Compare also Schiner, Fauna Austriaca, 

 Diptera, I, p 142. 



120. Mallopbora scopifer Wiod. It seems probable that Macquart's 

 M. scopifer is not the same as Wiedemann's. Schiner, Verb. Zool. Bot. 

 Ges. 1866, p. 77, has a M. scopifer Bell, non Wied. Cuba; which evi- 

 dently means Macq. non Wied., as Bcllardi has no M. scopifer at all 



