I9I4-] B. Brunetti : Review of Genera in Ciilicidae. 41 



Duttonia, Newstead. On this I can pronounce no opinion, 

 the 4- jointed & palpi being uncommon. The cf has the • anterior 

 tarsi sub-chelate." 



Eumelanomyia, Theob. This shows a little abnormality in 

 the thickened 2-jointed 9 palpi, and may be left as an uncertain 

 quantity at present. 



Orthopodomyia, Theob. This again has 4-3ointed d* palpi, 

 the 9 having 5 joints, the last '' minute but distinct." It re- 

 mains in abeyance. 



Lophoceratomyia, Theob. This ranks as a good genus on 

 the strikingly fantastic adornment of the cf antennae ; the 9 has 

 2-iointed palpi. 



Rachionotomyia, Theob. Generically distinct by the scutel- 

 lum being drawn out into a blunt spine. 9 only known. 



Cyathomyia, Meij. This is recently erected, near Finlaya, 

 and must be left here in abeyance as I know nothing of it, but 

 being established by a dipterologist and not by a culicidologist is 

 at least presumptive evidence in favour of its validity. 



Oculeomyia, Theob. From the original description of this, 

 alleging contiguous eyes^ " suggesting the family Acroceridae," 

 and from Theobald's figure I was willing to accord it generic rank. 

 Molpemyia, Theob-, is evidently identical. Yet Mr. Edwards says 

 it is founded on a misconception, many species with contiguous 

 eyes existing both in Culicini and Metanotricha (= my Sabcthini). 

 It is, of course, a question of degree of contiguity. Blanchard's 

 figures of Taeniorhynchus taeniorhynchus, W. (p. 291), Culex 

 fatigans, W. (p. 353), and others show the eyes contiguous or sub- 

 contiguous for a short space only, but in Oculeomyia they are 

 shown by Theobald as sub-contiguous for half their length, and 

 this seems to me sufficiently distinct from other genera to form a 

 separate genus. I am disposed to leave the question open at present, 



Deinocerites, Theob. {Brachiomyia, Theob.) The ver}^ long 

 2nd antennal oint makes this a good genus, the pilose cr' antennae 

 forming a second character. Theobald made a subfamily of this 

 genus and Dinomimetes , Knab, together, but the latter belongs to 

 the Sabethini and there is certainly nothing above generic rank 

 in either. 



Heptaphlebomyia, Theob. This has given rise to the most 

 erratic views, Theobald, when first describing it, saying it ' must 

 undoubtedly be placed in a separate subfamily on account of 

 there being 7, not 6, longitudinal scaled veins," ^ subsequently 

 (Monog. iv, 531) even adding, " the strangeness of the venation 

 might be thought sufficient to exclude them from the Culicidae 

 altogether," (!) yet he admits on the same page that the vein is 

 not, as a rule, scaled for its whole length, and finally Alcock 

 defines the genus as '' a somewhat modified Culex.''' 



1 Monog. iii, 336. 



