PSYCHE. 



ON THE RHOPALOMERIDAE. 



BV S. W. WILLISTON, LAWRENCE, KANSAS. 



Seventy years ago Wiedemann tie- 

 scribed a genus of flies of peculiar 

 structure under the name Ropalomera, 

 which he placed in the vicinity of 

 Platystoma. Latreille later included 

 the genus among the Ephydridae, to 

 which indeed the flies have a peculiar 

 resemblance, but his example has not 

 been followed by more recent writers. 

 Macquart, Walker, and Rondani all 

 agreed with Wiedemann in his views 

 of their relationship. I.,oevv at one time* 

 located the genus with the Platystomi- 

 nae. Laterf he wavered in his opinion 

 whether it should be placed with the 

 Sapromyzidae or the Sciomyzidae. 

 SchinerJ contended that Rhopaloiiiera, 

 and a new genus Rhinotoria, which he 

 elected, should constitute a separate 

 family. In this contention I think 

 Schiner was right, and my opinion is 

 based upon a critical study of several 

 species of the group as well as of several 

 hundred of those of the allied families. 



After a careful examination of the 

 literature, I (ind descriptions of the 

 following species : RhopaloDiera cla- 

 vipes, fciiiorata, pL iiropinictixta ^ and 

 stictica Wiedemann, itiaculipoinis 



* Neue Beilr., vii, 2. 



t Monographs, iii, 14. 



J Reise der Nov.ira, Dipt. 233. 



andjiaviceps Macquart, punctipennis, 

 siinilis and vHtifrons Rondani, tibi- 

 alis, varipes, and ? riijipes Walker. 

 Of these, I believe that only the first 

 six represent valid species ; the remain- 

 der are either identical with Wiede- 

 mann's and iVIacquart's species, or the 

 descriptions are unrecognizable. 7?. 

 ? riifipes Walker apparently does not 

 belong in the genus, although it may 

 possibly be a Rhinotoria. 



With these species are included two 

 species of Rhinotoria Schiner, neither 

 of which is known to me, and 

 possibly one or more known species of 

 Coelometopia Macquart. 



Of the genus Rhopalomera, in 

 Weidemann's sense, I have five species 

 in mv collection, which may be defined 

 as follows : — 



Eves ovaf or subreniform in sli.ipe. bare, 

 tlie frontat margins concave, and theii- 

 greatest proximity just befow ttie root of tlie 

 antennae. Front e.xcavated, flattened, broad ; 

 ocelli present; bristles short, two divaricate 

 ones at tlie angles of the eyes above, the 

 frontal and ocellar bristles absent or present. 

 Antennae short; third joint oval, with a baie 

 or plumose arista. Face broad, carinate or 

 with a strong median tubercle ; cheeks broad. 

 Clypeus projecting: no vibrissae. Proboscis 

 short, with thickened labella; paipi shoi't, 

 broadly spatulate. Occiput nearly plane. 

 Thorax elongate; mesonotum nearly bare. 



