TIPULID/E IN BRUNETTIS "FAUNA OF BRITISH INDIA" 119 



The following observations on certain of the species may be of Vcilue 

 to workers on the Oriental fauna. They represent merely the personal 

 opinions of the writer and whether these are right or wrong may be 

 ascertained from an examination of the types. 



Dicranomyia ornatipes Brun. (p. 380) is almost certainly an Eriop- 

 terine belonging to the subgenus Leiponeura Skuse of Gonomi/ia Meigen. 

 A study of the genitalia of the type would settle the matter. TTie author 

 merely remarks, " Genitalia yellowish brown, small, concealed, apparently 

 normal." 



Toxorhina incerla Brun. (p. 422). Brunetti states that there is no 

 mention of an open discal cell in any of the living Toxorhina. T. mu- 

 liebris O. S. of the eastern United States normally hsis this cell open as 

 shown by Needham (23d Rept. N. Y. State Ent., pi. 29, fig. 5) whose 

 figure is cited by Brunetti ! Moreover, on the page immediately preced- 

 ing Brunetti states that muliebris has the discal cell coalescent with the 

 second posterior. In such cases it is difficult to make out just what the 

 author is attempting to discuss. The remarkable venation of T. incerla as 

 shown twice in this volume is almost certainly an abnormeJity of the type. 



Erioptera brevier Brun. (p. 452) and Empeda inconspicua Brun. 

 (p. 475). In a recent article (Proc. U. S. Nat. Mus., vol. 44, p. 512) 

 I relegated Empeda Osten Sacken to a subgenus of Erioptera Meigen 

 and hesitated a long time before allowing it to stand at all. On plate 9, 

 figure 2, Brunetti figures the Erioptera and in figure 1 the Empeda, 

 and there is not one single point of difference between the two other 

 than slight specific characters. Empeda is merely an Erioptera in which 

 the fusion of /R2 + 3 is a little longer than usual. 



Gnophomyia Osten Sacken (p. 487). When we come to exeunine 

 the species that the author has placed in this genus we are strongly re- 

 minded of the work of Walker or Philippi of a half century ago. By 

 means of the author's own keys in this volume it would be imp>ossible to 

 run most of the species down to this genus or even to this tribe I 



G. longipennis Brun. (p. 489) is a Rhaphidolabis and probably the 

 same species as Claduroides and Rhaphidolabis fascipennis. 



G. genitalis Brun. (p. 490) and G. f areata Brun. (p. 49 I ) probably 

 Limnophila but certainly not Gnophomyia. 



G. aperta Brun. (p. 492) is a Rhaphidolabis. 



G. incompleta Brun. (p. 493) equals a Pleciromyia Osten Sacken, 

 but this, in turn, should be relegated to the synonymy of Rhaphidolabis. 



