1889.1 395 



tellum is nigrescent at the base, while in U. scufellans it is wholly pale, as in M. 

 Tpagana. The abdomen in II. variegata has always a decided black longitudinal 

 stripe on the dorsum, which becomes widened posteriorly, giving it a strong resem- 

 blance to the abdomen of Musca corvina ; in H. scutellarh, on the contrary, the 

 dorsal stripe is either wanting or only short and narrow ; the abdomen also has the 

 edges of the segments often marked with transverse black lines, which are not found 

 in H. variegata. The females of the two species are more difficult to distinguish 

 from each other, as the shoulders of those of II. variegata arc often rufous like those 

 of H. scutellaris. 



This species seems to be rare upon the continent ; I have not seen a British 

 example. 



II. LUGUBniS, Mj^Il. 



Several distinct tliough very closely allied species have been n)ixed up under 

 this name. Zetterstedt separated two from H. luguhris, which he named H. morio 

 and H. consobrina, but his diagnostic points of distinction are not very clear, espe- 

 cially those separating II. morio from H. Ivgiibris, which, from his description, 

 would only appear to be varieties of the same species, as he seems to have suspected 

 himself, for he says, "forte famen specie diversae." There is no doubt, however, 

 that there are sevei-al quite distinct species allied to II. luguhris. 



Some years ago I received a specimen of Eyetodesia from Herr Kowarz, captured 

 at Aseh, in Bohemia, which he labelled H. luguhris ; this was the only fly bearing 

 this name which I had then seen, and the remarks made in my list respecting this 

 species (in the description of H. diibla) were taken from it. Having lately obtained 

 other specimens named H. luguhris from Dr. Sclinabl, of Warsaw, and Herr Kuntze, 

 of Dresden, I find that they are quite distinct from Herr Kowarz's example, and upon 

 sending the latter to Dr. Schnabl, he tells me that it is a new and undescribed 

 species. 



This group of species has been very carefully studied by Dr. Schnabl, and the 

 several distinct ones which he has defined are most elaborately described. He makes 

 H. morio, Zett., to be quite distinct from H. luguhris, Mgn., the eyes of the male 

 being subcoherent in the former, while they are contiguous in the latter; the arista 

 in H. morio is also shorter haired, and the epistome less prominent than in H. 

 luguhris; besides which, the number of post-sutural central dorso-thoracic bristles 

 is not the same, there being four in H. morio and only three in H. luguhris. Dr. 

 Schnabl has also fully described H. consobrina, Zett., wliich he says has a still shorter 

 epistome and shorter haired arista than H. morio. I do not know whether he has 

 seen Zetterstedt's types, or named these decidedly distinct species after him upon 

 his own authority. Dr. Schnabl has also described anothef and new species be- 

 longing to this group, which he has named H. hyhrida. 



To show the difficulty of defining the characters of the true H. luguhris of 

 Meigen, I may mention that the specimens sent to me from Warsaw and Dresden, 

 though exactly similar in most points, such as having the projecting snoutlike epis- 

 tome, long haired arista, contiguous male eyes, black indistinctly striped thorax, &c., 

 which are characteristic of the species, had a different number of post-sutural 

 thoracic bristles, those from Warsaw having only three, while those from Dresden 

 had four. 



