416 MAJOR W. S. PATTON. 



P. C. Abildgaard. In order to discover the exact locality from which the type was 

 obtained, Major Austen kindly searched the hterature to see whether this Professor 

 P. C. Abildgaard was ever in India, but beyond the fact that he was a Veterinary 

 Surgeon, and interested in natural history, there is nothing to show whether he had 

 travelled in India. The exact localit}' from which the type of Musca nehulo came 

 must then, in the meantime, remain doubtful. I think, however, that it can be safely 

 assumed that it was obtained from some large Indian town. Wiedemann, who 

 evidently examined the type, does not give any information on this point. His 

 somewhat fuller description, however, fits this common Indian house-fly very welL 

 Short of examining the type I see no reason to doubt Major Austen's determination 

 of its identity, and consider it is best to retain this name for it. 



I have carefully, and repeatedly, examined the type of Walker's drferminata^ 

 a female in bad preservation, from the East Indies (not the West Indies as 

 erroneously stated in my paper on the Mesopotamian house-flies), and after com- 

 paring it with typical specimens of the Madras house-fly (M. nehulo), have come to 

 the conclusion that it is identical with it. There seems to be no means of discovering 

 from what part of India the type of determinata was obtained, but the town of 

 Calcutta seems to be the most probable locahty. In my paper on the Mesopotamian 

 house-flies referred to above, the species there described as Musca determinata. 

 Walker, is not conspecific with Walker's type, but is the next species recorded in these 

 notes. 



Although I have not had an opportunity of examining the type of Awati's Musca. 

 multispina, I have little doubt from his description of the female that it is Musca 

 neh'ido. 



I have examined many hundreds of specimens of nehulo from many localities in 

 India, Burma, Assam and Ceylon, and find that though it varies to some extent in 

 colour and markings, it is a very distinct species and cannot be confused with either 

 Musca domestica or Musca domestica (atypical) noted below. The miajority of the 

 specimens when in good preservation have white cheeks, a grey thorax and yellowish 

 abdomen, with silvery tesseUation. In the male the frons is narrow, about as broad 

 , as the width of the third antennal segment (antero-posteriorly), and although in some 

 specimens it is a trifle narrower, and in others a little wider, I have not seen a single 

 specimen whose frons in any way approaches the v/idth of the frons of the male 

 Musca domestica. 



I shall be glad to receive any specimens of this species from any area outside 

 India, so as to compare them with those found in various parts of India. 



2. Musca domestica, L. (atypical). 



Synonyms : Musca biseta, Hough. 



Musca divaricata, Awati. 



Musca determinata, Patton {nee Walker). 



This species, which for the lack of a better name I propose in the meantime calling 

 Musca domestica (atypical), is the one which comes very near the true European 

 Musca domestica, so far as external characters are concerned ; it is one of the other 

 important house-flies of India. Both sexes have been described by Awati under 

 the name divaricata, and this observer points out that it closely resembles nebula 

 {multispina, Awati), but can be distinguished by noting that it is a much yellower 

 fly than nebulo, and the abdomen is not nearly so silvery. The frons of the male 

 of this species is about as wide as that of the male nebido, and is from a quarter to 

 one-fifth the width of the eye. I have not seen a single specimen of the male of this 

 species with a frons as wide as in the male of domestica. I consider it is there- 

 fore distinct on this character alone. It is, however, not possible at present to give 



