92 XEW YOrtK STATE MUSEUM 



pp Front Dietatarsi shorter than their tibiae 

 q Thorax produced eonically in front 

 over the head ; hind tibiae dilated 

 and hairy, pi. 34, fig.24 



43. E u r y c n e m u s 

 <jij Thorax moderately produced ; hind 

 tibiae not dilated 



44. AI e t r i o c n e m u s 

 ee Antennae with thirteen to fifteen joints 



f Antennae fifteen- jointed ; European and ti'opic genera 

 fir Wing hyaline ; legs very long ; antennal joints of vai'ying 



lengths, pi. 35, figs. 1, 2, 3 30. M a c r o p e z a 



gg Wings spotted (West Indies and Mexico) ....5. Oecacta 

 ff Antennae with fourteen or fewer Joints 



g Thorax rounded and not produced over the head ; antennae 



with thirteen or fourteen joints ; legs of moderate length 



h Antennae witJi thirteen joints ; wing venation as shown 



on pi. 35, figs. 10 and 14 



i Palpi with three joints. (This is probably a synonym 



of the next) 2. Tersesthes 



ii Palpi with four joints 1. Leptoeonops 



]ih Antennae with fourteen joints, plumose in the male, 

 sparsely haired in the female ; wing venation as on 



pi. 17, figs. 13 to IG {Group Ceratopogon) 



i Wings hairy ; last joint of tarsus with an empodium 

 i Empodium well developed ; almost as long as the 

 claws, these without setae, pi. 18, fig.7 



3. Ceratopogon 

 A- Hind metatarsi shorter than the second tarsal 

 joint, or both of equal length 



(Sub. gen. F o r c i p o m y i a ) ' 

 Ik Hind metatarsus longer than the second joint 



( Sub. gen. Ceratopogon) 



/;■ Empodium not so distinct, less than half as long as 



the claws ; these furnislned with setae on the under 



side, pl.l8, fig.8 4. Culicoides 



il Wings bare ; pulvilli and empodium wanting 

 j Wing with Ri distinctly separated from R2+3 and not 

 connected with it by tlie crossvein-like R2, pl.17, 



fig.15 6. Bezzia 



jj Wing with R. present ; cells somt'tuues indistinct, 

 pl.17, figs. 13, 14, [(\ 

 k Media wanting, pl.17. fig.l3 



7. B r a c h y p o g n 



'According to Kieffer (1902) this subgenus can not stand, because in some 

 species one sex would be classed here and the other sex with the next 

 subgenus. 



