12Q [June, 



being placed at that time in the genns Helomyza, Meigen was absokitely right 

 in changing the name of his species and being i-ight then his action must be 

 accepted as right /o?- a H time quite irrespective of Avhat happened to tigrina, 

 Fin., afterwards. Mik (Ent. Nachr., 1897, p. 1.33) first advocated the use of 

 the name tigrina, Mg., for this species under the mistaken idea that Fallen liad 

 described his species as Heteromtza tigrina, which of coiirse would have 

 altered the case entirelj\ Czerny states that the above case is similar to that 

 of Helomyza rufa. Fallen, and so it is, for neither rufa. Fin., nor tigrina, Mg., 

 were new names and therefore could not supplant any name siibseqiiently proposed 

 for the species included under Fallen's and Meigen's concepts, consequently the 

 name r\ifa. Fin., cannot supplant flava, affinis, or Isevifrons, and the name 

 tigrina, Mg., cannot svipplant similis, Mg. 



Eccoptomera longiseta, Mg., microps, Mg., and ornata, Lw., have been 

 recorded by Mr. J. E. Malloch as occiu-ring in Britain in the pages of this 

 Magazine. Mr. Verrall caught a female of longiseta at Fawley (Hants.), on 

 June 21st, 1875, and Col. Yerbury found it at Studland (Dorset) in Jane, 1907 ; 

 microps is foiind not uncommonly in moles' nests, and in additional to other 

 published records, I have seen specimens taken by Mr. J. H. Keys in Devon, and 

 by Mr. E. C. Bedwell in Siiffolk, Mr. Verrall foimd a male at Felixstowe 

 (Suffolk), on Jvily 14th, 1894, and Col. Yerbmy a female at Barmouth 

 (Merioneth), in May, 1902. Mr. C. G. Lamb has taken longiseta at Padstow 

 (Cornwall), and Dr. J, H. Wood has found both species in Herefordshire. 



*Ecco2)tomera excisa, Lw., has been taken by Dr. Wood diu-ing the months 

 of October and November in Herefordshire. 



Scoliocentra villosa, Mg. — I have seen two <? ^ and one ? of this species 

 taken by Col. Yerbury at Nairn 9/7/04, and Aviemore (Inverness) 15/5/04 

 respectively ; the strong ci^rved apical spine to the middle tibiae is a sexual 

 character of the male only, liut the hairy meso- and pteropleurse will separate 

 the genus from Leria (Blepharoptera). 



Blepharoptera, Mcq. — This genus must be known as Leria, Dsv., as used by 

 Schiner and Eondani. 



Leria caesia, Mg. — This is a large species allied to spectabilis, Lw., but 

 always with darker antennae and clearer wings, which has been in the List of 

 Reputed British species, upon Curtis' record in the addenda to the 2nd Edition 

 of his Gviide to the Arrangement of British Insects (1837). The specimens I 

 have seen were taken by Dr. J. H. Wood and Col. Yerbury in Herefordshire. 

 on October 17th and 21st, 1902. 



*Leria flavotestacea, Zett. — This is not an Eccoptomera as given in Kertesz's 

 " Katalog," Vol. iv, nor is it the same as longiseta, Mg., as Zetterstedt sixpposed, 

 but a true Leria. It has been taken by Col. Yerbury at Porthcawl (Glamorgan), 

 and Hay (Brecknock) in May, and at Forres (Elgin), and The Moiind (Suther- 

 land). 



* Leria dupliciseta, Strobl. — Two males from Dr. Capron's collection pro- 

 bably taken at Shere (Surrey), and a male found by Col. Yerbiiry at Porthcawl 

 (Glamorgan), on Jime 5tli, 1903, appear to represent the above s^iecies ; it has 

 two pairs of vibrissae (one long and one short), two strong sternopleural bristles, 

 mesopleiu-» with a few bristles, pale antenna*, scutellum, abdomen, and legs. 



