j^22 ^- ^- Verrall : 



who was usnally exceedingly accurate but here he quoted 

 the genus, perhaps frotn Bigot, as Ozirhynchus wbich he 

 amended into 



Oxy rrhy nch US. 

 In 1861 in Dipt. Ital. Prodr. IV. 8 Rondani retracted 

 bis apparent concession of 1856 (Oxijrhyncus), and leplaced 

 Gzirhyncus, which two names he unfortunately indexed on 



page 171, as 



Oxyrhincus and 



Ozyrhyncus. 



In the same year in Att. Soc. Ital. Milano, II, he gave 



np his generic name as being too similar to the Coleopterous 



genus, but still contending that his genus which he called 



Ozirhynchus on page 288, Ozirhyncus on page 294 and 



Ozy rh i nch US 

 on page 291 was distinct fiom Loew's genus Clinorhyncha, 

 he renamed it on page 291 



Acorhynchus 

 presumably from äx.-^ PTX^?? ^'^^ o^ page ^§8 he mentioned 

 the genus as 



Acyrhynchus. 

 The old name was not by any means done with yet, for 

 in 1864 Lioy in Atti Ist. Venet. (3), IX. 501 referred to it as 



Oxyrincus 

 and Schiner in his „Novara Reise", page 3 (1868) as 



Oziorhincus. 

 After this the poor genus had a six years rest, reappea- 

 ring in Walker's Notes on Diptera 14 (1874) as 



Oziorhynchus 

 then (inter alia) in Scudder's Nom. Zool. I. 4 (1882) appears as 



Achorhychus! 

 with a derivation 'j;'j;! puvp;! neither of which words occur 

 in ray Greek Lexicon, nor do I see how 'j;'j:, whatever it 

 may be, could produce Acho- ; I presume ö;-j; and p'jy/o: were 

 intended, as from the Greek öc-j; comes the Latin aciis: on 

 page 5 appeared 



Acorrhynchus 

 with my own name given for the reference ; I have never seen 

 this word in print before, but it did occur in an old manu- 



