MEKIANIA ARGENTIFERA. 251 



but also finally placed them in a distinct section, far away from 

 the true Nemoma species, calling the section Platijchira ; and 

 Verrall, in his revised ' List of British Diptera,' published 1902, 

 accepts the name Meriania, and gives pu2)arum, F., as the one 

 British representative. Plaiychira, with its single genus Meriania, 

 is well characterized by the facts that the facial angles (a) stand 

 well above the mouth edge {h), which projects between them; 

 that the cheeks (c) are very hairy, as well as the eyes ; that the 

 third antennal joint {d) is short and broad, and but little longer 

 than the second (c) ; and that the female has its fore tarsi 

 flattened out. The other characters of venation, &c., which 

 are less distinctive, can be gathered from Mr. Lucas's excellent 

 drawings. 



N. puparum, F., has been known as British since Walker's 

 time, but, so far as my knowledge goes, seems to be always rare. 

 I have never met with it mj^self, and only possess one British 

 specimen, a fine large male taken at Holmbury last April by 

 Dr. T. A. Chapman. This particular specimen is fully 6 lines 

 long, and is larger than any of my Continental types. It is a 

 handsome, robust-looking insect ; the general colour brown, with 

 the scutellum and the sides of the second and third abdominal 

 segments red, with interrupted white shimmering bands occupy- 

 ing the fore half of the second to the fourth abdominal segments ; 

 the head dark greenish brown, with a golden shimmer on the 

 lower parts, and the usual dark line on the frons ; the palpi are 

 yellow ; the antennae and legs all black ; the whole insect very 

 hairy, with discal and marginal macrochetge on the abdominal 

 segments, the remaining characters being the same as shown in 

 the drawing of argentifera. 



N. argentifera, Meig., seems to be a smaller insect. The one 

 male taken by Mr. Lucas is barely 4^- lines long, and looks about 

 half the size of Dr. Chapman's piip)aruin. I expect, however, 

 that as a rule the difference is not great, and, of course, in the 

 Tachinidge, size is of little, if any, value for specific distinctions. 

 The principal difference between puparum and argentifera is that 

 in the former species the hairs on the cheeks (c), and many of 

 those on the chins (/) and back of the head {g), are pale (Schiner 

 says white, but in mine they are golden, and I expect they are 

 always so in fresh specimens), whilst in argentifera they are black 

 throughout. Other differences are, that in argentifera the general 

 colour is more blue-black than brown, and the white shimmering 

 bands on the abdominal segments are very faint, and only to be 

 seen plainly at the sides. Schiner says that the forehead in the 

 male of argentifera is wider than in puparum, taking up "almost 

 one-third of the whole head-width " ; it is certainly a little wider 

 in Mr. Lucas's specimen than in puparum, but not much, and 

 certainly does not take up one-fifth of the total head- width. 

 Schiner also says that the red on the abdomen is less noticeable 



x2 



