180 FIRST ANNUAL REPORT OF THE STATE ENTOMOLOGIST. 



result of the comparison is given in the following interesting commu- 

 nication received from him : — 



" The specimens of onion-fly which you sent to me are [very nearly] 

 identical with Hylemyia antiqua Mgn. The only difference between 

 your specimens and those that I have, named by the late Professor 

 Rondaui, is that in yours, the arista is rather less pubescent. Curiously 

 enough, I have bred several specimens myself this summer (since the 

 part of my paper on the genus Hylemyia was published) from onions, 

 some of which were sent to me by Miss Ormerod, Entomologist to the 

 Royal Agricultural Society in England, which are all exactly like 

 yours. They must be placed Avith Hylemyia antiqua, unless, on account 

 of the shorter pubescence of the arista, they may be considered as a new 

 species. They must, however, be removed from the genus Hylemyia 

 (the arista not being plumose) and placed in that of Phorhia (part of 

 Clwrtopliila according to Rondani)." 



As the result of further study, the species has been found to be dis- 

 tinctly separable from H. antiqua. Its chief points of difference are 

 stated to be in its simply pubescent antenna, its interrupted dorsal 

 stripe upon the abdomen, and its clear wings, as opposed to the sub- 

 plumose antennas, a continuous abdominal stripe, and the brown wings 

 of antiqiia. It is represented as far excellence an onion-fly, as all the 

 ■specimens seen, had been bred from the bulbs of that vegetable. In 

 some instances, it had been discovered feeding upon bulbs in associa- 

 tion with Phorhia cilicrura, both species passing through their trans- 

 formations at the same time. 



In the Entomologisfs Monthly Magazine for March, 1883, Mr. Meade 

 has carefully described the species, and, in consideration of its having 

 for some time been confounded with H. antiqua, has given it the name 

 of Phorhia cepetorum, n. sp. Inasmuch as the A. ceparum of Meigen 

 is, at the same time, given by Mr. Meade as a synonym, with doubt, of 

 the new species, — as he also admits that it may be identical with the 

 A. ceparum of Bouche' and Meigen, which he has not identified, — and 

 as there are other reasons which render it quite probable that it will 

 prove to be the same, it seems proper that the specific name, so 

 familiar to us from its long use, should still be employed for this species, 

 and so continue, unless it can be clearly shown to pertain to another. 

 Its New Generic Position. 



The genus Phorhia, to which the onion- fly has been referred as 

 above, was proposed by Desvoidy, to include a portion of the old 

 genus Anthomyia, which had been found to be so large as to be in- 

 convenient and to contain greatly varying forms. The subdivisions 

 that had been made by Desvoidy, Macquart and Rondani seem to 

 Mr. Meade to be either too many or too artificial. In the new arrange- 

 ment, which, in consideration of the critical study which has been 

 given to it, will doubtless be generally received, he proposes to retain 



